What is The Minimum Megapix Digital Back To See A Difference

[rollsman44]

 I am still thinking about getting a MF and DB Used and reasonable to shoot my wedding portraits and some outdoor shots of Bride & Groom. I have a Canon 5D MK2 with Canon L Lenses. I was told not to switch unless the DB is at least 30Megapix. Can anyone on the forum add to this or make suggestions. Thank you, rollsman

[bcooter]

You'll see a difference even with a p21.  Probably the lack of an AA filter, but there is a bigger difference between an aa filter dslr than there is an 18mp to 30 mpx back.




IMO

BC

[tho_mas]

do you know this comparision? -> http://www.flickr.com/photos/dos-chin/sets/72157614936120567/with/3340880206/
I for one like the H2/CF22 shot best (in this particular comparision)...

[Doug Peterson]

I am still thinking about getting a MF and DB Used and reasonable to shoot my wedding portraits and some outdoor shots of Bride & Groom. I have a Canon 5D MK2 with Canon L Lenses. I was told not to switch unless the DB is at least 30Megapix. Can anyone on the forum add to this or make suggestions. Thank you, rollsman

See a difference in what?

Color, gradations, file flexibility, skin tones, look of the lenses, variety of bodies you can use it on, 3d feeling, out-of-camera sharpness? Any modern back of any resolution and most of the legacy backs will smoke a 5D Mark 2 (even a Phase One H25 from 2003).

Large bright viewfinder, availability of waist level finders and vertical shooting without turning the camera, bodies with different-than-35mm ergonomics (for better or worse depending on your preference), availability of leaf shutter lenses, availability of built in wireless transmitters for flash? Many medium format cameras have some or most of those and no dSLR does.

Resolution? I'd argue (from experience - though see my signature for my bias) an 18mp back exceeds the real world detail of a 5d mark 2 with L lenses.

Please don't fall into the marketing trap of resolution. It IS important (crops, large prints, repurposing etc) but it is only ONE element of many that makes a camera right for you - or not right for you.

No medium format has video-capture or on-lcd live view. Most medium format cameras are going to be slower, heavier, not perform as well in low light subject tracking autofocus, and have ISOs fairly or very limited compared to dSLRs. There are a few exceptions here like the P40+ which will shoot ISO3200 at 1.8 frames per second (with a virtually infinite buffer) though at a reduced file resolution. And to get the most out of medium format you'll need good technique and experience/practice (an out of focus or camera-shaken 80 megapixel file won't go as far as a sharp 22 megapixel file).

Consider all the positives, all the negatives, talk to a dealer that you trust that can help sort through various options, then TRY a camera out (include some prep time to just get used to it) in a real world scenario and decide for yourself.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870  |  Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off

[rollsman44]

  I really can't see that much of a difference in the test shots. They all looked good to me. What is AA filter?  Can you recommend a setup ( MF and DB appr $6,000) in total that I can purchase  and from where to buy it. I would appreciate that very much. I am NOT looking for speed but IQ. Thank you, rollsman

[marcman]

An H20 (16mp) on a Hasselblad 500c/m  ( Zeiss Glass) will knock the IQ of any DSLR out of the water. Its in the tonality, the gradations and the COLOR. We got a P25+ last year and only use it when we have to ( Laptop dies, H20 in for service etc), because the colors and tones suck with it, probably because they made it more sensitive to light. We actually meter at a higher ISO with the P25+ ( Camera set to 100 ISO, meter set at 160) to try and battle this. Pixel size is important for color and tonality, and no DSLR can compete with MF ( think full frame vs. crop).

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

An AA-filter is used on all DSLRs (except Sigma DSLRs) in order to reduce/eliminate what is called aliasing effects. In common practice aliasing is seen as colorful moires. An AA-less camera will have problems with moiré under unfortunate conditions.

The AA-filter softens the image so Moiré is eliminated. That really means that AA-filtered images need more sharpening (large amount with very small radius, like 300, 0.4) which also enhances noise.

An AA-filter is theoretically absolutely needed, but most photographers prefer the visual sharpness of an unfiltered image.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliasing

This article looks at aliasing in images from Leica S2 (without AA-filter) and Nikon D3X with AA-filter (be sure to click on the images for actual pixels)

http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/38-observations-on-leica-s2-raw-images.

And this is a lengthy discussion by many knowledgeable people on the issue:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=30758.0

Best regards
Erik

 I really can't see that much of a difference in the test shots. They all looked good to me. What is AA filter?  Can you recommend a setup ( MF and DB appr $6,000) in total that I can purchase  and from where to buy it. I would appreciate that very much. I am NOT looking for speed but IQ. Thank you, rollsman

[wildstork]

Eric,
You left out the best of the 35mm cameras with no AA filter: the Leica DMR.  No insignificant oversight as it still barks with the big dogs (to quote Marc Williams) when it comes to fine detail rendition and it only has a 10 mp sensor.
Lawrence
 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

There are advantages to bigger pixels. They will not test lens resolution to the same extent as smaller pixels. As resolution goes up edge contrast go down. A larger sensor with bigger pixels puts much less demands on lenses than a small sensor with smaller pixels.

Modern MF digital, like the Pentax 645D and Leica S2 have small pixels, like those on the Nikon D3X or the Canon 5DII. These systems need very good lenses.

Lloyd Chambers has recently shoot with Leica S2 and Hasselblad H4D 50. He found both cameras had problems with achieving correct focus, but when the Leica S2 was correctly focused it outperformed the Hasselblad by a large margin, depending on the Hasselblad lenses not being good enough. It is of course possible that both Hasselblad lenses he tested were bad samples.

I really would recommend that you try to rent an equipment and find out what fits your needs.

Make sure you read this: http://www.josephholmes.com/news-medformatprecision.html

Best regards
Erik

I am still thinking about getting a MF and DB Used and reasonable to shoot my wedding portraits and some outdoor shots of Bride & Groom. I have a Canon 5D MK2 with Canon L Lenses. I was told not to switch unless the DB is at least 30Megapix. Can anyone on the forum add to this or make suggestions. Thank you, rollsman

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Well, of course, there are quite a few others, but none in recent production. Regarding the sensor it may also matter what you put in front of it (like lens and subject) and what you put behind it (photographer). By the way putting a good tripod under it also helps!

Best regards
Erik

Eric,
You left out the best of the 35mm cameras with no AA filter: the Leica DMR.  No insignificant oversight as it still barks with the big dogs (to quote Marc Williams) when it comes to fine detail rendition and it only has a 10 mp sensor.
Lawrence
 

[amsp]

I have an old P25 back (22MP) on a Mamiya AFD, and a Canon 5D mkII. The canon is great for those times when speed and high ISO is more important, I use it all the time for catalog type work. But the P25 still smokes it when it comes to image/file quality and it's my main choice of camera when I'm doing editorial and advertising work.

[hjulenissen]

Hi,

An AA-filter is used on all DSLRs (except Sigma DSLRs) in order to reduce/eliminate what is called aliasing effects. In common practice aliasing is seen as colorful moires. An AA-less camera will have problems with moiré under unfortunate conditions.

Adding to your explanation:


The images above are from a company that removes the AA filter from cameras. This is a 1:1 crop of a 5D with and without the AA filter.

Notice how the image on the left have acute details, but the marquis of the air-conditioner shows false details. These can be very hard to remove automatically.

Nikon D200:


-h

[rollsman44]

I appreciate the info. I will look into a P25, P21 or H20, H25 as my back. I dont know if my budget will allow me to get the Hassey. I was thinking of the Mamiya 645 AFD II or III with one of these backs. Thanks,  rollsman

[ced]

Any of The Blad, Phase, Leaf and Sinar from 16 - 30 mpx. Should make your mouth water.

[DavidP]

In my experience the 22 megapixel backs tend to have more of a problem with moire. Maybe it depends on what you shoot. I found it in shirts and clothing a lot.
It can be very time consuming and sometimes difficult to fix.
Where as with the 39 megapixel it is almost never a problem. I am not sure about the 30 and 40 megapixel ones perhaps they are better too.
It is the one drawback of not having the AA filter.

[fredjeang]

Eric,
You left out the best of the 35mm cameras with no AA filter: the Leica DMR.  No insignificant oversight as it still barks with the big dogs (to quote Marc Williams) when it comes to fine detail rendition and it only has a 10 mp sensor.
Lawrence
 

The Leica DMR is absolutly fantastic, and in print it's just amazing. But you really have to have already a R system because it is a dead end road investing in this. Then the next and only step is the S system, and nothing from your R works of course. Too bad Leica did not continue the 35mm R.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

The reason that color moires are reduced with increasing resolution is that the lens itself acts as an AA filter. Aliasing arises when the lens outresolves the sensor. A technically more correct way of saying the same is that the lens has significant MTF at the Nyquist limit.

So, making pixels smaller, defocusing the lens or stopping down beyond optimum aperture will reduce MTF for fine detail and therefore reduce the risk for moirés.

Another way to see it is that you don't get moirés with high res backs either because your lens is not good enough or because your technique is not good enough!

Lloyd Chambers of "Diglloyd (R)" fame has found that the Leica S2 lenses reach optimum performance at f/5.6 but need to be stopped down to f/11 to eliminate moiré. So the lens will loose enough MTF around f/11 to avoid moiré.

Best regards
Erik

In my experience the 22 megapixel backs tend to have more of a problem with moire. Maybe it depends on what you shoot. I found it in shirts and clothing a lot.
It can be very time consuming and sometimes difficult to fix.
Where as with the 39 megapixel it is almost never a problem. I am not sure about the 30 and 40 megapixel ones perhaps they are better too.
It is the one drawback of not having the AA filter.

[free1000]

IMHO,  you ought to rent a digital back and camera, the one you intend to buy, and then test it, if not on an actual wedding then in a scenario where you are similarly time limited in shooting.  Although a DB requires some experience to get fast with, it is always slower than a 5D2 in use.

The quality of your output is a function of what you can do in your situation, under the pressure of the shoot, as well as in the quality of the file. 

I would think that you should at least make sure you choose a DB that has the speed you require. I love my Aptus 75, but although I've used it on a number of portrait shoots, I wouldn't choose to use it in a situation where I am not in control of the time, ie: in event based shooting. For that I always switch back to my trusty 5D2 and one of those nice wide aperture L primes as I want to be focused on the subject, not on the speed of my camera, manual or slow MF focusing or any of the legion of other MF based issues.

But if you want one, you'll buy one! We're all gear heads here after all.

[design_freak]

Hi,
Lucky you :-)
If you want to buy new equipment. At the moment, the best is "Hasselblad H4D40" or model H4D31. H4D40 is the best hardware I've ever seen for a really reasonable price. If it's expensive hardware. I recommend Mamiya DM22. There are a lot cheaper and still beats all of the 35mm segment.

Best regards,
Design Freak

[Juanito]

I shoot weddings. Occasionally, I'll bust out my Hassie with my 22mp Leaf back. The only way I can tell the difference between my MF shots and my 5D MII shots is that the Hassie images are more square. The client sure as heck can't tell the difference. If you're doing albums, the difference won't be noticeable no matter how many megapixels you have. For a large wall print, you may see a marginal difference in sharpness if you put your nose to the glass, but again, the client won't be able to tell the difference once it's on the wall.

I'm not saying that small format is objectively equal to medium format in things like sharpness, tonal range etc. It's just that, especially for weddings, the client can't tell the difference. Add to that the fact that MF is slower in AF and frame rate. It's heavier and not as flexible so when the bride and groom are laughing and having fun, you're going to be missing out on shots with the MF. A slightly less perfect shot with great emotion is going to beat out a stiff looking higher megapixel shot every single time.

I use the MF (at weddings) when I'm looking for something more structured or if I want to bust out my lighting. Usually though, I prefer the small format shots just because they have more life to them.

John